ralian Govenmants
posistion on TCPA and the USA's Senetor Fritz Hollings Consumer Broadband
and Digital TV Protection Act.
I have emailed him twice before on different issues, and received replies.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
s an upgrade
> available.
>
> However, emailing all my friends and family and trying to explain
> TCPA to them and ask them to push for a referendum (as was suggested
> in one post(rant)), smacks of fanaticism.
If they're really your friends, why not? I don't see an
rally more technical savvy than ordinary people] can figure out how to
explain it to our families and friends. Most people know the term "big
brother" and don't particularly like it, but accept it. That's why it's
useful to encourage them to complain about issues like this. S
2002 1:14 PM
To: 'debian-user '
Subject: RE: Microsoft's plans to kill open source: TCPA
Matthew Joyce said on 11/5/02 10:09 AM
Perhaps people will start to use the existing cpus for longer, and
recycle older ones, distributed processing etc, instead of
feeling they
mu
> From: David Pastern [mailto:david@;scsenterprises.com.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 November 2002 1:14 PM
> To: 'debian-user '
> Subject: RE: Microsoft's plans to kill open source: TCPA
>
>
> Matthew Joyce said on 11/5/02 10:09 AM
>
> >Perhaps people will start
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 01:17:28PM +1100, David Pastern wrote:
> Yes my comments were a rant if you want to look at that (hell I think I
> actually said that in the post in jest). If you want to call it fanatacism
> so be it. It's people that sit on their bums and cop it sweet and don't
> complai
s and family and trying to explain TCPA
>to them and ask them to push for a referendum (as was suggested in one post
>(rant)), smacks of fanaticism.
OK, sit on your bums, wait for the US to fully gratify this, the rest of the
world will follow like sheep and we'll end up being screwed by
Perhaps people will start to use the existing cpus for longer, and recycle
older ones, distributed processing etc, instead of feeling they must upgrade
their hardware because there is an upgrade available.
However, emailing all my friends and family and trying to explain TCPA to
them and ask
- Original Message -
From: "Josh Rehman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 11:01 AM
Subject: RE: Microsoft's plans to kill open source: TCPA
> It's really hard to control the container because people are sma
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 12:35:17AM -0600, Scott Dier wrote:
> Luckily, if this happens to x86 some day, everyone in 'Free' communities
> will have a damn good reason to leave this platform in droves. :)
From what I've read, this won't actually work: TCPA enabled system
ffect.
> Microsoft has bent its every division to a single goal in the past; it
> would be foolish to assume that they aren't doing so this time.
I'm guessing that someday that TCPA disabled-ability could go away much
now Microsoft has slowly made sure 'Per Connection' typ
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 12:19:44PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> FUD! FUD FUD FUD FUD!!! This is completely all wrong. Recently a talk
> was given at MIT by one of the designers of Microsoft Palladium (their
> trusted computing initiative) at MIT. I was at the talk, which received
> lots of
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 02:00:39PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> I don't think that TCPA will kill open software. But I do think that
> it's part of an ongoing effort to erode the freedoms which are behind
> open software.
Agreed 100%. I said previously in this thread that I do
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 12:19:44PM -0500, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> The only negative thing I see comming out of TCPA is that content
> producers (Hollywood, etc) will release copies of their
> movies/music/whatever for download in a format that can only be accessed
> on TCPA syste
not his primary reason for opposing it. He sees that the
possibility is there, which it is).
> The fact stands: Linux won't maybe load at all on a TCPA enabled
ches. Containers can (and will) be broken,
despite the legality of it. I think that this is even more likely since
TCPA container's security policies are controlled remotely - and that is
much worse than a static security policy. These are going to be some
*really* well motivated ornery sons-of-bi
Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> [ I've pruned the giant list of innappropriate and off-topic CCs ]
>
> On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 11:57:51PM +0100, Hauke Goos-Habermann wrote:
>
>>Microsoft plans to kill all OpenSource software on hardware level. This
>>technology is called
[ I've pruned the giant list of innappropriate and off-topic CCs ]
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 11:57:51PM +0100, Hauke Goos-Habermann wrote:
> Microsoft plans to kill all OpenSource software on hardware level. This
> technology is called TCPA.
FUD! FUD FUD FUD FUD!!! This is completel
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 08:49:15AM -0800, Bob Nielsen wrote:
> Hopefully AMD will make non-TCPA x86 chips rather than caving-in to
> the M$/Intel collusion.
No such luck, AMD is part of the TCPA consortium too.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "
from everyones worries.
Hopefully AMD will make non-TCPA x86 chips rather than caving-in to
the M$/Intel collusion.
I read some stuff about this all and as it seems now:
-TCPA can be (partially) turned off, the 'piracy detection' feature
would still be active
-The keys would _not_ be
> like Sun or some other hardware maker should mass produce non x86 PCs.
> That'll jettison M$ *and* intel from everyones worries.
Hopefully AMD will make non-TCPA x86 chips rather than caving-in to
the M$/Intel collusion.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 22:53:48 -0600
From: "Larry Alkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Top posting so this can be clearly read. . . .
That's where I stopped reading.
~
~
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAI
On 03/11/02 David Pastern did speaketh:
> Personally, i'm very anti religion, very anti government, very anti modern
> fiscal policy. They are all evil implementations of control over the normal
> populace.
Lets lose the bulls**t rhetoric please and stick to the fscking point.
You're hurti
>
> I know - but the point I was making was that there are already too
> many political and commercial pressures supporting Linux to NOT let
> someone put a strangle hold on the keys for lots of $$. Anyone
> trying it will
>
> a) Either be trumped by government who will ensure that linux
> deve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 03 November 2002 8:56 am, Klaus Imgrund wrote:
> It seems the problem is not how to do it but how to pay for it.
> Every new version of every program needs to be certified and that will
> cost a lot of $$ - I am sure somebody will see to tha
; In the meantime, can anyone please tell me what this TCPA is all
> > > about?
> >
> > Have a look at Ross Anderson's excellent TCPA / Palladium FAQ at
> > <http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html>.
>
> I am not convinced that Open Source will be kill
Alan Chandler wrote:
>
...
> If we then have a situation where Windows software has all these controls
> built in to it - with keys being controlled back at Redmond, and Linux with
> the keys being controlled by the owner of the PC (I am assuming the open
> source community will still use the fac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 03 November 2002 5:27 am, John S. J. Anderson wrote:
> "Larry Alkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the meantime, can anyone please tell me what this TCPA is all about?
>
> Have a look at Ross Anderson&#
website previously posted on Sunday 03/11/2002
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html
Very interesting read. I don't know about America, but Australia has things
called referendums. They're hard to force, but if public opinion is strong
enough the Australia government
Larry Alkoff wrote:
>
> Top posting so this can be clearly read.
>
> I'm interested in what TCPA is but the web site mentioned is very poorly written.
> There is no clear explanation of what TCPA is and why it should be opposed
> on the main page.
>
> Examinati
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 12:27:03AM -0500, John S. J. Anderson wrote:
> "Larry Alkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In the meantime, can anyone please tell me what this TCPA is all about?
>
> Have a look at Ross Anderson's excellent TCPA / Palladium F
"Larry Alkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the meantime, can anyone please tell me what this TCPA is all about?
Have a look at Ross Anderson's excellent TCPA / Palladium FAQ at
<http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html>.
john.
--
Internet FAQs, #666:
Top posting so this can be clearly read.
I'm interested in what TCPA is but the web site mentioned is very poorly written.
There is no clear explanation of what TCPA is and why it should be opposed
on the main page.
Examination of the web site gave me no information about TCPA at all.
I
fight
inch by inch.
Our virtual freedom is in danger since Internet started to be what is now.
Chainy.
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 11:57:51PM +0100, Hauke Goos-Habermann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Microsoft plans to kill all OpenSource software on hardware level. This
> technology is called TC
Hi,
Microsoft plans to kill all OpenSource software on hardware level. This
technology is called TCPA.
What's TCPA in general you can read at the anti-tcpa site:
http://antitcpa.alsherok.net/
All OpenSource developers should think the same way: If TCPA becomes reality
GPL is dead.
Now we
35 matches
Mail list logo
